This is a useful reading from a scholar in the field, for all those who may be flattered by a fallacy, that one may have a common “bluer group blood” or at the other end a “redder one to be sacrificed” than the rest of their community.
During the last decades, in some of postmodernism traits a subtle form of racism is resurrecting and reconstructing itself all over the globe, be it under the mask of the “better religion” or “scientific explanation” or a common medial day-to-day presence (“salon-fähig”)!
An Edge Original Essay
Steven Pinker [6.18.12]
“What all this means is that so-called group selection, as it is invoked by many of its advocates, is not a precise implementation of the theory of natural selection, as it is, say, in genetic algorithms or artificial life simulations. Instead it is a loose metaphor, more like the struggle among kinds of tires or telephones. For this reason the term “group selection” adds little to what we have always called “history.” Sure, some cultures have what it takes to become more populous or powerful or widespread, including expansionist ideologies, proselytizing offensives, effective military strategies, lethal weaponry, stable government, social capital, the rule of law, and norms of tribal loyalty. But what does “natural selection” add to the historian’s commonplace that some groups have traits that cause them to grow more populous, or wealthier, or more powerful, or to conquer more territory, than others?” (p6 see link below)
“…if humans were selected to benefit themselves and their kin in the context of group living (perhaps, but not necessarily, by also benefiting their groups), then any guaranteed self-sacrifice should be a product of manipulation by others, such as enslavement, conscription, external incentives, or psychological manipulation.” (ibid)